5 ms·
If a company’s business model is aligned with statements by its CEO, I would consider those statements more valid, not less. Apple is putting its money where Ti
by turboturbo 9y ago
If a company’s business model is aligned with statements by its CEO, I would consider those statements more valid, not less. Apple is putting its money where Tim Cook’s mouth is. That’s a good thing.
- darawk 9y agoThey didn't align their business model in order to further privacy, though. It just happened to shake out that way. If Apple cared in the slightest about issues like this, they wouldn't make it impossible to control your own hardware when you buy an iPhone.
- jpttsn 9y agoThat’s Apple cared only about issues like this. In the slightest is too narrow. Plausibly they care for many things and trade them off.
- darawk 9y agoThat's fair. My point is only that self-interest explains more variance here than caring about privacy. They may genuinely care about privacy to some degree - just as i'm sure Google and Facebook do. They both just care about profit more, and for Google/FB, those things come into conflict. For Apple they don't.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- glhaynes 9y agoYour stance seems unfalsifiable. If a company did exist that cared more about their values than profit, how would you recognize it? But more importantly: who cares? We’re not judging whether Tim Cook oughta get into heaven. People seem highly driven by the profit motive, arguably more than by most other motives. If Apple’s goals are aligned with mine and motivated by profit so they’re likely to be careful to keep from damaging their reputation... great!
- darawk 9y agoIt is falsifiable, i've explained elsewhere my reasoning, but i'll repeat it here: The same basic moral orientation that would motivate one to care about privacy would also motivate them to care about freedom. Apple's policy of not giving you sovereignty over your device is anti-freedom. However, the thing that explains both behaviors is self-interest. It's to Apple's strategic interest to focus on privacy, it's not to their strategic interest to focus on freedom. Therefore, the most likely explanation for their behavior is their strategic self-interest, and not any moral orientation towards privacy. It's also been brought up by others that Apple discards its privacy morals when it comes to China. Which is another point in the "probably doesn't actually care about privacy" column. Occam's razor says the simplest explanation is most often true. The simplest explanation here is self-interest.
- innagadadavida 9y agoso in summary you are saying 1. Apple is selfish (like any other company). 2. Their self interest is coupled to user privacy (but not freedom or moral values).
- darawk 9y agoI'm saying that their stance on privacy is motivated by self-interest. Nothing more, nothing less.
- whytaka 9y agoWhat disincentives are implicit in Apple's business model that discourages collecting more data from their users?
- darawk 9y agoNot collecting user data is something that only Apple can do. Google depends on data collection for its primary revenue stream. Apple does not. This means that focusing on privacy is a uniquely competitive tactic for Apple to take, and they have shrewdly taken it. To be absolutely clear, i'm not disparaging them for taking this position. I think it's great. I'm just trying to contextualize it.
- whytaka 9y agoAnd yet we know that the personal data of your customers is worth billions. And we also know that nothing about writing walled software ecosystems prevents one from syphoning this data. So it would appear that Apple has purposefully left money on the table. So please tell me how that fits with your 'self-interest' explanation of Apple's stance here.
- darawk 9y agoI already have elsewhere in this thread, but here goes: Google's primary business model is contingent on user data collection. Apple has the most profitable business in the world, which is not contingent on user data collection. Yes, you are absolutely correct that Apple is leaving a few billion dollars on the table by not doing this. However, that's only true in a fairly narrow, greedy (in the sense of a 'greedy algorithm') sense. Taking a more strategic perspective, you would look around and see that your competitors have to collect this data to survive. But you don't. That makes this a weakness for them, which means that it's a differentiating factor for your product that they can never copy. This strategic advantage is worth much more than the few billion in quick cash they might pick up by monetizing their user data.
- whytaka 9y ago
- joesb 9y agoIf the CEO of a tobacco company say cigarettes do not cause cancer, should should consider this statement valid?